1

SG/Inf(2013)38

Information Documents

SG/Inf(2013)38

29 October 2013

————————————

Consolidated report on the conflict in Georgia

(April 2013 – September 2013)

————————————

Document presented by the Secretary General

1

SG/Inf(2013)38

Introduction

  1. At their 1080th meeting on 24 and 26 March 2010, the Ministers’ Deputies took the following decision: “The Deputies, restating the previous decisions of the Committee of Ministers, invited the Secretary General to prepare his consolidated report on the conflict in Georgia based on his outline and taking into account the comments made during the present meeting”.
  1. It is recalled that the objective of the report is to take stock of the situation in Georgia following the August 2008 conflict, to report on the related activities of the Council of Europe and to propose further Council of Europe action. The report is composed of four parts:

-update on major developments in the period under review;

-assessment of statutory obligations and commitments related to the conflict and its consequences;

-human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict; and

-current Council of Europe activities aimed at addressing the consequences of the conflict, their follow-up as well as proposals for future action.

  1. This eighth consolidated report covers the period between April and September 2013. It builds on the seven previous consolidated reports[1], as well as Secretariat reports on the human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict in Georgia[2] and the report on the Council of Europe activities in the areas affected by the conflict[3] and its updates[4].
  1. The Secretariat carried out a fact-finding visit to Tbilisi on
    9-11 September 2013 and had the opportunity to discuss the situation with the Georgian authorities, representatives of civil society and international organisations. The Secretariat wishes to express its gratitude to the Georgian authorities for their support in organising the visit and to all interlocutors for their assistance and valuable contributions.
  1. For the purpose of this report, despite efforts of the Secretariat,the delegation was not allowed to visit Abkhazia and South Ossetia.The Secretariat, thus, had no opportunity to discuss with the de facto authorities the human rights situation on the ground or to reflect on their position on other issues touched upon in the present report. Despite these developments, the Secretary General intends to pursue his efforts in view of fact-finding visits to Abkhazia and South Ossetia for the preparation of future reports.
  1. This report does not replace the monitoring procedures established in the Council of Europe. Nor should it be seen as prejudging any possible decisions in the cases related to the conflict and its consequences, which are currently pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
  1. Nothing in this report should be interpreted as being contrary to the full respect of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia within its internationally recognised borders[5].
  1. This report does not prejudge or infringe upon a possible future political settlement of the conflict within the framework of the Geneva International Discussions, nor the implementation of the Six-point agreement of 12 August 2008 and the implementing measures of 8 September 2008.

IUp-date on major developments in the period under review

  1. Thepositive developments, declarations and usefulinitiatives which occurred in the reporting period in multilateral and bilateral fora did not have a decisive impact on the situation on the ground,nor did they constitute a breakthrough on the main issues at stake.
  1. The direct contacts initiated recently between Mr Zurab Abashidze, Special Representative of the Prime Minister of Georgia in charge of relations with Russia, and Mr Grigoriy Karasin,Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation continued during the reporting period.They met twice in Prague on 4-5 June and 19 September. As in the previous two meetings, economic, humanitarian and cultural issues were discussed with the aim of improving the atmosphere between the two countries. A number of other bilateral meetings between Georgian and Russian officials also took place.
  1. As a result of thesecontacts, the import into Russia of a number of Georgian agricultural productsincluding wine and mineral waterhas resumed.In addition, the two countrieshave agreed to resume cross-border passenger and cargo road transportation.[6]As part of its efforts towards a normalisation of relations with Russia, the Georgian government also confirmedthat Georgian athletes would participate in the Sochi Olympic Games and that the Georgian government was ready to cooperate on security-related issues during the Olympics.
  1. On the Russian side, on 5 May, President Vladimir Putin sent a letter to the people of Georgia on the occasion of the 68th anniversary of the Victory dayover fascism. The perspective of a full restoration of relations between Georgia and Russia was also mentioned at the highest political level[7] in Russia during the reporting period.
  1. Contacts between the Churches continued.On 23 July the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill met with Patriarch of Georgia Ilia II in Moscow.Patriarch Ilia II also met with President Putin during this visit.Patriarch Ilia II expressed hope that the complicated Russia-Georgia relations would improve and never decline again.
  1. However, in the absence of any major breakthrough, the Government of Georgia reaffirmed that “diplomatic relations will not be restored until this situation changes”, in reference to Russia’s recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.[8]Georgia’s policy of non-recognition towards Abkhazia and South Ossetia was reiterated on several other occasions by the Government of Georgia, including during Prime Minister Ivanishvili’s address before the PACE on 23 April 2013. On that occasion, the Prime Minister reiterated Georgia’s will to engage in dialogue with Russia and to restore relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia through a peaceful rhetoric. However, he stressedthat “there can be no progress towards peace in the region if Georgia is expected to abandon its legitimate interests, especially its territorial integrity and the right of its citizens to return to their homelands.”
  1. During the reporting period the issue of “borderisation” along the Administrative Boundary Lines (ABL), especially on the South Ossetia ABL,caught the attention of the international community, sparked protests of the Georgian government and was reported to further complicate the situation on the ground, especially as regards the daily life of the population (for further details cf. section III). A corresponding statement of the Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs was distributed by the Georgian Permanent Representation at the meeting of the Committee of Ministers on 18 September.Speaking about this issue and while acknowledging that additional improvements are feasible, PM Ivanishvili insisted that the “borderisation”is problematic for the improvement of relations between Georgia and Russia.[9]In the same vein, on 13 September, the Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs protested against the announced development of a border agreement between the Russian Federation and South Ossetia.[10] The Russian Foreign Ministry insists that these issues fall within the competence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
  1. During the meetings with the delegation, the Georgian authorities regretted the impossibility for the European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) to access Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
  1. During the period under review, the State Minister for Reintegration (SMR), MrPaata Zakareishvili, confirmed openness for direct dialogue and confidence building between Sukhumi, Tskhinvali and Tbilisi. In that respect, Mr Zakareishvili emphasised that “the new Government of Georgia has chosen the peaceful, constructive and pragmatic course of resolving the conflict.”[11]
  1. The Secretariat was informed by the Georgian authorities that a proposal for the change of the name of the State Ministry for Reintegration is still pending approval by the President, as mentioned in the previous report.
  1. As for the adoption of the legislative amendments to the Law on the Occupied Territories initiated by the SMR with an aim to modify and liberalise the sanctions for entry into Abkhazia and South Ossetia via entry points other than the territory under the control of the Georgian authorities, they were adopted at first reading on 17 May but were still pending before Parliament in September.The Russian Federation continues to call for thelaw to be repealed.It considers in particular that the law hinders the access to and co-operation activities in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
  1. Against this background, during the reporting period the twenty-fourth round of Geneva International Discussions took place,on 25-26 June. Addressing the security situation on the ground, the participants reiterated the need to resume the Gali Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM), which as of 30 September had still not resumed. They welcomed the continuing good functioning of the Ergneti IPRM. The discussion on the issue of Non-Use of Force continued, with an exchange of views on a Co-Chairs’ draft joint statement. The Co-Chairs also raised the issue of the fencing and digging activities along the ABL, which they found regrettable and which have reportedly affected the freedom of movement and livelihood of local populations.It was noted that, overall, the security situation on the ground, especially on both sides of the ABL with Abkhazia, was relatively calm and stable.
  1. Issues related to humanitarian aspects of freedom of movement, missing persons and living conditions were also raised in the working group II of the Geneva International Discussions. The commitment on behalf of all concerned to address the issue of missing persons was welcomed.Progress has also been acknowledged in confidence-building projects, including projects on resource sharing, particularly water in South Ossetia.[12]
  1. However, the two working groups on security and the humanitarian situation reportedly did notcomplete their respective agenda due to a lack of consensus on organisational matters.[13] Participants nevertheless remained committed to continue the discussions within the Geneva Framework as it remained the only platform for discussion in the aftermath of the 2008 conflict.
  1. The Georgian authorities stressed to the delegation that, while in line with a constructive and result-oriented approach, the general positions of its participants in the Geneva Discussions remain unchanged.
  1. On the 13 June, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted the Resolution tabled by Georgia “Status of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, Georgia”.

IIAssessment of statutory obligations and commitments related to the conflict and its consequences

  1. Below is an update on statutory obligations and specific commitments - as listed in PACE Opinions 193 (1996) and 209 (1999) - which have been selected for the purpose of reporting on the conflict in Georgia and its consequences. This part builds on Part 1 of the first and second consolidated reports on the conflict in Georgia (SG/Inf(2010)8 and SG/Inf(2010)19 final).
  1. To accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to collaborate sincerely and effectively in the realisation of the aim of the Council of Europe
  1. To settle international as well as internal disputes by peaceful means (an obligation incumbent upon all member states of the Council of Europe), rejecting resolutely any forms of threats of force against its neighbours
  1. Since the last report, the procedure of the European Court of Human Rights continues. There are no major developments to report eitheron the Inter-State application No. 38263/08 Georgia against Russiaoron the individual applications against Georgia, or against the Russian Federation.
  1. To respect strictly the provisions of international humanitarian law, including in cases of armed conflict on its territory
  1. In the reporting period, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) continued its activities in Abkhazia as before. In particular, the coordination mechanisms established for the issue of missing persons under the aegis of the ICRC keep on functioning. The ICRC also continues to gather data on mine victims and amputees in Abkhazia and to provide them with small scale economic assistance.
  1. The ICRC also remains engaged in South Ossetia where, in addition to its work on clarifying the fate of missing persons, it facilitated the exchange of messages by separated families, organising family reunifications, providing support to families of missing persons, visiting detainees and providing small-scale humanitarian and economic support where needed.
  1. On 30 May 2013, it was reported that Georgia’s Chief Prosecutor met the families of three missing from South Ossetia, whose cases had been reopened.[14] The Public Defender of Georgia continues to monitor the on-going investigation.
  1. To co-operate in good faith with international humanitarian organisations and to enable them to carry out their activities on its territory in conformity with their mandates
  1. To facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to the most vulnerable groups of the population affected by the consequences of the conflict
  1. According to the information provided by the Georgian authorities, 31 new confidence-building projects were submitted in the reporting period, bringing the total number of projects submitted by international and local organisations in the framework of the Georgian Government’s “Modalities for Engagement”[15] since 15October 2010 to 165. All of them received non-objection orders.
  1. The Georgian authorities also reiterated their support to mechanisms and channels beneficial for confidence building, such as the Liaison Mechanism. The latter continues to function.
  1. The delegation was informed by the international and civil society interlocutors that the de facto authorities of Abkhazia are questioning the necessity of purely humanitarian aid and are reportedly said to be opento consider more sustainable forms of co-operation. In this respect, it was reported to the Secretariat that the intention by the de facto authorities of Abkhazia to limit humanitarian co-operation to the Gali district has affected the work of some NGOs. However, overall, main actors involvedwere able to continue carrying out their on-going activities.
  1. While underlining that humanitarianneeds must be addressed wherever they occur, several international interlocutors acknowledge that there would indeed be a scopeand logic for a more sustainable co-operation. The Georgian authorities do not object to an increased presence or co-operation of international actors in Abkhazia, as long as the envisaged activities take place with the consent of the competent Georgian authorities.
  1. International organisations and various individual Statescontinued to support humanitarian and other co-operation activities in Abkhazia. These activities wereco-funded and implemented by United Nations (UN) agencies as well as by localnon-governmental organisations. For instance, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) continued to provide humanitarian assistance mainly in Gali, inter alia by giving direct assistance to those in need through counselling as well as shelter and income generation support. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) remained focused on the restoration of basic social services (especially infrastructure rehabilitation) by rehabilitation of schools, small health clinics, maternity wards and water supply systems. The United Nations Children's Fund(UNICEF) activities are focused on education, healthcare (including access to primary healthcare and immunisation of children), HIV & Aids (including community support, counselling as well as prevention and awareness programmes), water, sanitation and hygiene for children and physical rehabilitation and other support for children with disabilities.
  1. As a donor, the European Union, in addition to Confidence Building Early Response Mechanism (COBERM), supports projects in Abkhazia to facilitate the access to primary healthcare, through the rehabilitation of facilities, training of medical officers, awareness-raising and prevention campaigns. Some projects facilitate contacts between the Abkhaz academic community and European universities, and aim atimprovingthe quality of education.Several projects target sustainable income-generation, through business development training and private sector development, farmers associations and food processing, the development of markets and rehabilitation of land. The projects on education and sustainable income-generation are however reported to be affected by the move towards concentratingco-operation activities in Gali. The EUis also funding a regional research and advocacy project that is intended to strengthen the capacity of
    peace-building activities in the South Caucasus.
  1. The work of international non-governmental organisations present in Abkhazia, such as the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Action Contre la Faim (ACF), WorldVision and Première Urgence, is primarily focusedin Gali. The DRC and NRC work on livelihoods/sustainable income generation as well as legal and shelter assistance. The work of WorldVision, ACF and Première Urgence include EU-supported activities on improving the quality of education, agriculture and farmer’s associations,food processing and the rehabilitation of land.
  1. The EU, UNDP and the government of the Netherlands support, through the COBERM, the work of local NGOs which aims to facilitate direct people-to-people contacts across the ABL and seek to improve the environment within divided communities. Various projects in the area of human rights, media, health, youth and education, peace-building and gender issuesare implemented mostly by local NGOs in Abkhazia, South Ossetia as well as on theterritory controlled by the government of Georgia.
  1. Activities in South Ossetia are by nature more limited in character due to a more difficult access. Nevertheless, in the period under review, various projects facilitating people-to-people contacts have been implemented by NGOs, often with support of COBERM.The EU continues (until the end of the year) to fund activities of the OSCE in South Ossetia and adjacent areas on the rehabilitation of water supply systems.

IIIHuman rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict

III.1Reports on Abkhazia

  1. As mentioned in the Introduction to this report, the Secretariat was not able to obtain the agreement of the de facto authorities to visit Abkhazia. The information presented in Chapters III.1.i – III.1.v is based on discussions with the Georgian authorities, civil society representatives, international organisations as well as open sources.

III.1.iSecurity